On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Rintze Zelle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tickets: > > Allow dependent styles to define an overriding default-locale value > https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/91 > My opinion: would like to implement proposal as is > My question: whether any CSL-implementators have problems with this, since > information in dependent styles will start to affect how the independent > parent style is rendered Yeah, this seems to me an important question: it fundamentally changes the meaning of a "dependent style" to include processing override behavior. I can see the value of this particular case, but do we really want to go down this path now? > Create new terms for commonly used text strings > https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/90 > My opinion: would like to add terms for "supra" and "available-at". I'm not > yet convinced that any of the other candidates are popular enough to warrant > a term. > My question: what happens if a CSL 1.0.1 processor encounters a CSL 1.0.1 > style calling a new term and only has a CSL 1.0 locale file which doesn't > define the term? (CSL 1.0.1 should be backward-compatible) Would it make > sense to have a hardcoded list with default term values in each CSL > processor for CSL 1.0.1 terms? I support this change, but think implementers should tell us how they're going to respond. > Add "page-range-format" option for OSCOLA > https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/84 > My opinion: would like to implement proposal as is, although I'm still > undecided about the best name of the attribute value. It's a bit nitpicky, > but I prefer "minimum-two" over "minimal-two" ( > http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=935755 ) I agree with you. > Add a test condition context="citation" / context="bibliography" > https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/80 > (probably will mostly be used in complex styles, which are less likely to be > ever edited with a style editor) > My opinion: would like to implement proposal I never understood this issue, but think I do now: It is to allow authors to define single macros that can define behavior across the citation/bibliography divide. Is that right? If yes, this is another subtly big issue. Right now, citation and bib configuration are strictly separate. This would change that. Pro: allows less verbose styles Con: changes the essential logic of CSL, and potentially (?) could lead to really confusing styles Question: do the pros really outweigh the cons? Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ xbiblio-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
